RoB2-Evaluator: Development and Technical Evaluation of a Rule-Constrained Large Language Model System for Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 Assessment
Joseph, J. T.; Vishwanath, R.; Sisirkumar, J. V.
Show abstract
BackgroundCochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) assessment is methodologically demanding and resource intensive. Large language models may assist this process but can produce variable judgments. AimTo develop a rule-constrained LLM system for RoB 2 assessment and evaluate its temporal stability and agreement with human reviewers. MethodsRoB2-Evaluator was developed using GPT-5.2 with fixed RoB 2 guidance and a locked instruction framework. Seven RCTs were used for calibration before version freezing. The frozen system was evaluated on 10 separate RCTs, with repeat assessment after one week and comparison against consensus judgments from two independent human reviewers. ResultsTemporal agreement was 90.0% (weighted {kappa} = 0.93), and agreement with human consensus was also 90.0% (weighted {kappa} = 0.93). Methodological rationales were stable in 94.3% of repeated comparisons. Full AI-human conceptual alignment occurred in 85.7%. ConclusionRoB2-Evaluator showed encouraging post-freeze stability, human agreement, and rationale consistency, supporting larger independent evaluations.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Exploring the potential of Claude 2 for risk of bias assessment: Using a large language model to assess randomized controlled trials with RoB 2 96%
- Evaluation of the sensitivity, accuracy and currency of the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register for supporting rapid evidence synthesis production 96%
- Fast and frugal decision tree for the rapid critical appraisal of systematic reviews 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Updating the PRISMA reporting guideline for network meta-analysis: a scoping review 95%
- Large language models for conducting systematic reviews: on the rise, but not yet ready for use – a scoping review 95%
- The use of the Registered Reports format for publication of randomized clinical trials: a cross-sectional study 94%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Does pre-notification increase questionnaire response rates: a nested randomised control trial 94%
- Does advance contact with research participants increase response to questionnaires: A Systematic Review and meta-Analysis 94%
- Completeness of reporting of clinical prediction models developed using supervised machine learning: A systematic review 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Protocol for the development of a tool (INSPECT-SR) to identify problematic randomised controlled trials in systematic reviews of health interventions 96%
- Agreeability testing of AMSTAR-PF, a tool for quality appraisal of systematic reviews of prognostic factor studies 96%
- The incubation period of COVID-19: A rapid systematic review and meta-analysis of observational research 95%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.